Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) writes that tea partiers don't like America.

[Deep13]

"...History tells us that rage on the right should not be confused with populism. The far right attacks government regulation as it feeds Wall Street and the insurance companies. It rails against government spending for the least privileged as it lavishes tax cuts favoring the most privileged...."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-10-04-column04_ST1_N.htm

[bluestateguy]

1. Good, we need to hear more of that counter rhetoric

I have no doubt that if a Republican president were opposed by a liberal movement calling itself the Tea Party, only this time on the grounds of anti-war, anti-surveillance state, and pro-civil liberties issues, that they would be denounced as anti-American traitors who support Al Qaeda.

Now the test is for Brown after the expected Teabag whining: DO NOT apologize. No Dick Durbin blubbering on the Senate floor redux please.

[Deep13]

7. Sherrod isn't going to back down.

I know him personally. He really, really resents the Republicans and how they do things. To him progressive versus conservative reationary is nothing less than a struggle for and against human rights. He's something he wrote in 2005 after he decided to run for the Senate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-sherrod-brown/why-im-a-progressive_b_12536.html

[independent_voter]

2. Democrats need to focus on their own message, rather than 'grading' the message of others

for several years, any time I discussed anything with a democrat, the answer was always 'let me tell you about george bush...' and i would say 'i get it ...he sucks...but i already know that'

sometimes i think tea party is just the democrat's new george bush

it's might be ok for preaching to you own chior, but doesn't go far anywhere else, it just smells of ducking issues

[Deep13]

6. I don't agree.

I used to share an office with a Republican who used to find specific faults with Ds and D. policies. My response was always the same. "You would have a point if he were running against Jesus Christ. As it is he's running against that slimeball so-and-so."

This year, the mood of the electorate is largely "throw the bums out." It is important for them to know that slow progress is a hell of a lot better than letting the rock roll right back down the hill.

[independent_voter]

8. as someone concerned about the free trade that both parties supported

it sounds a lot like 'shut up, we dont want to talk about that' to me

[Deep13]

10. I think you're right on that. nt

[JohnnyLib2]

3. But, but, they wear red, white and blue!

And can't see past that. :banghead:

Good for Sen. Brown. Rec.

[Matariki]

4. Rachael Maddow rightly called them anarchists.

[Erose999]

11. I wouldn't call them "anarchists"... they are the kind of people who think laws are for everyone but

themselves (White/Christian/pro life/pro gun). Everyone else, should be heavily regulated.

They are trying to set up a theocracy/plutocracy.

To call them anarchists gives real anarchists (and anarcho-syndicalists) a bad name.

[liberal N proud]

5. The right does not listen to history

"History tells us that rage on the right should not be confused with populism"

In fact they want to change it to fit their needs.

Sharrod Brown is as close as you can get today to a good statesman. We could use a lot more like him.

[booley]

9. The term "Useful Idiots" springs to mind

Seriously teabaggers rail against things like the bail out but then also oppose anything that would keep future bail outs from becoming necessary.

They are just tools of the people paying for the astro turf.